The hepatic GABAergic system promotes liver macrophage M2 polarization and mediates HBV replication in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Macrophages display functional phenotypic plasticity. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection induces polarizations of liver macrophages either to M1-like pro-inflammatory phenotype or to M2-like anti-inflammatory phenotype. Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) signaling exists in various non-neuronal cells including hepatocytes and some immune cells. Here we report that macrophages express functional GABAergic signaling components and activation of type A GABA receptors (GABAARs) promotes M2-polarization thus advancing HBV replication. Notably, intraperitoneal injection of GABA or the GABAAR agonist muscimol increased HBV replication in HBV-carrier mice that were generated by hydrodynamical injection of adeno-associated virus/HBV1.2 plasmids (pAAV/HBV1.2). The GABA-augmented HBV replication in HBV-carrier mice was significantly reduced by the GABAAR inhibitor picrotoxin although picrotoxin had no significant effect on serum HBsAg levels in control HBV-carrier mice. Depletion of liver macrophages by liposomal clodronate treatment also significantly reduced the GABA-augmented HBV replication. Yet adoptive transfer of liver macrophages isolated from GABA-treated donor HBV-carrier mice into the liposomal clodronate-pretreated recipient HBV-carrier mice restored HBV replication. Moreover, GABA or muscimol treatment increased the expression of “M2” cytokines in macrophages, but had no direct effect on HBV replication in the HepG2.2.15 cells, HBV1.3-transfected Huh7, HepG2, or HepaRG cells, or HBV-infected Huh7-NTCP cells. Taken together, these results suggest that increasing GABA signaling in the liver promotes HBV replication in HBV-carrier mice by suppressing the immunity of liver macrophages, but not by increasing the susceptibility of hepatocytes to HBV infection. Our study shows that a previously unknown GABAergic system in liver macrophage has an essential role in HBV replication.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".